Bad Advice circa 2007

dunstonh

God what a load of toss ers lol - Im sure if you had been mis sold PPI youd want it back no? lol

You were not mis-sold if it was compulsory. If an insurance product was a requirement to get the mortgage deal then as long as the insurance was suitable, then that is not a mis-sale. They usually offer a selection of insurances in this scenario. I recall several deals like this and usually it was MPPI or life assurance and sometimes you could just get away with home insurance.

If it was not compulsory but you were lied to then that is a mis-sale but it is weakest of the PPI complaints. Rarely does evidence exist that points towards that likely having occurred.

did people who had PPI mis sold shop about?

Quite possibly, yes.

Please outline evidence for all mis sold PPI? - Good luck with that.

Most complaints about MPPI are rejected. Today, it is one of two types of PPI that are still retailed. It suffered fewer issues and is still considered a viable product.

Halifax though are a bit of a walkover. They tend to refund most PPI complaints without any real issue. Even on cases where there is no evidence of wrongdoing. it should be noted that their TMPP product is multi-segment and they only refund the MPPI segment. They do not refund the life assurance or other segments.

mrginge

toff33 wrote: »

Are you serious? - PPI? Did I have to prove anything?? no - I simply stated the individual told me i had to take it to get the mortgage passed. same as the mortgage product. its not too difficult to understand

You are beyond help.

kingstreet

As far as the mortgage sale went, was this an advised sale where you sat down with an authorised person who asked you questions and then made a recommendation, or did you get an information-only appointment where four or five illustrations were placed in front of you and you were asked to pick one?

Advice when interacting with human beings for example in a bank or building society branch has only been mandatory since March 2014.

minimike2

As far as I read this, you were ineligible for a mainstream mortgage and had to go down the self-cert route. Halifax did not offer the product you wanted on the self-cert mortgage, yet you applied anyway. Now the home has fallen in value, you are looking at someone to blame? If you didn't feel that the mortgage was right for you, you didn't have to apply and could have looked elsewhere. The terms were all laid out in the Key Features Illustration, then repeated in the offer. One does not simply sign such things in relation to huge sums of money where you feel it isn't right for you.

I can see no reason at all why a Halifax advisor would advise you to have a self-cert product if you were eligible for a mainstream product - I highly doubt they were targeted to specifically sell self-cert mortgages and it would have offered them no advantage to do so. Unless there is more to it and you are saying your income didn't stack up and so you had to inflate it using self-cert to get the mortgage you wanted, in which case this changes to a matter of mortgage fraud on the part of both you and the advisor.

The PPI - It does seem to have been mis-sold. I assume you have raised this as part of the complaint and this will be dealt with.

Also, your abusive post #9 is not really welcomed - I have reported it as abusive.

kingstreet

I don't recall Halifax ever offering self-cert.

It may have been fast-tracked, but that had no impact on product selection, it was a function of credit score.

minimike2

toff33 wrote: »

Simply put I was told the only way id get a mortgage "passed" was to take a self cert SVR product.

Not sure, but the OP seems to think it was. Fast track makes more sense since BM Solutions was the self cert part of the banking group.

If it was an abuse of fast track then again I don't see how the product would have made a difference. But then I have never worked for the Halifax so I don't know...... I do recall many years ago they only used to offer certain products if they were doing an "income stretch" - Maybe it could have been something to do with that. End result is the same though.